Law & Disorder —

Plans for .xxx top-level domain pop up again

It's baaaaaaack. The controversial .XXX domain will be discussed at this week' …

The .xxx domain is back on the table. The Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) will reconsider the top-level domain during a meeting in Kenya this week, nearly three years after it was shot down and nine years after it was first introduced as a way to identify pornography sites and hopefully confine them to their own Internet red-light district.

The .xxx domain was first proposed in 2001 and approved in 2005 for exclusive (but voluntary) use by the adult entertainment industry. The idea was to provide a place for porn sites online that would be explicitly obvious from the domain, which would not only help consenting adults find the sites, it would also help parents and corporations better block access to them.

The latter, however, was not how some family groups saw the situation—the US Department of Commerce later reported having received 6,000 letters from concerned citizens over .xxx (many of which were auto-generated from the Family Research Council). The letters stated that they didn't want to give pornographers more opportunities to "distribute smut on the Internet" and that parents would have false hope in protecting their families. The heavy push from the US eventually led to ICANN's reversal of its earlier decision to green-light the top-level domain (TLD) and an official cancellation of the plans in 2007.

Three years later and we're back at square one. Two weeks ago, an independent panel from the International Center for Dispute Resolution said that ICANN goofed when it rejected .xxx. The decision was not a binding one, but ICANN clearly feels that the issue is worth reconsideration after all; the organization confirmed to the BBC that it would discuss the TLD again this week to decide whether it wants to move forward on it—again.

ICM Registry, the company that would resell the .xxx domains if they are approved, seems confident that the TLD approval will go through. "Our claim was that ICANN came up with a lot of different excuses," ICM Registry chairman Stuart Lawley said. "If the contract is signed, we could be selling names by the end of the year."

This, of course, is an optimistic view. An ICANN spokesperson told the BBC that there's "no indication what action the ICANN board will take," and it's unlikely that the domain will be approved during the March 12 meeting even if ICANN decides to reconsider it. One thing we're sure of, however, is that the anti-porn crusaders will come back out of the woodwork if .xxx is approved again and ICANN can look forward to many more e-mails like this one.

Jacqui Cheng
Jacqui is an Editor at Large at Ars Technica, where she has spent the last eight years writing about Apple culture, gadgets, social networking, privacy, and more. Emailjacqui@arstechnica.com//Twitter@eJacqui

The .xxx domain was first proposed in 2001 and approved in 2005 for exclusive (but voluntary) use by the adult entertainment industry.

This is the reason why it will not work, and why it's a waste of time -- unless it becomes mandatory that all pr0n site have a .xxx TLD then it's useless. But, who is going to police it? Who is going to classify what's pr0n what what's not? Surely it will differ between countries...Giant. Waste. Of. Time.

As near as I can tell, the only people in favor of a .xxx TLD are the people who will be selling the domain names. And for good reason. There is little to no value there. Domain names are an intrinsically bad way of tagging content:

Very simple solution: Abolish all .tlds except for the national ones. Let each nation handle its own registry, have its own regulations, and let them worry about how to handle and organize pornographic content. The websites would be subject to the regulation of their own host country and no other - so if you're under the .us domain, you can't be sued for violating the laws of France unless you duplicate that material to the .fr domain.

Barbara Alexander is a GENIUS. That woman succinctly and intelligently summed up a host of legitimate reasons why the .xxx TLD is only going to put more smut on the internet. Without it, clearly there is no way it would ever spread, but with it the world will be awash in tits and penises. It is the downfall of modern civilization.

Or not. Jeez, at least try to make a coherent sentence if you are going to convince someone of your view point. And use spellcheck. And such.

As for the idea of a TLD dedicated- sure why not. It's no worse than trying to use .org for non-profits, or limit .edu to actual schools. But will the purveyors take to it and give up the domains they have now? Without a commitment from them I don't think it will make any difference at all.

I think many porn sites would voluntarily use it. Why not, focuses audience and much easier to keep the kiddies away. Plus, from a marketing standpoint it creates even more of a "forbidden fruit" genre, keeping the viewers coming.

Anyone thinking all "smut" will magically be whisked away to it's own TLD is engaging in wishful thinking. Those purveyors will continue to use the web presences they have established already in additional to the new TLD. Otherwise they risk being in some kind of internet ghetto, and shortly thereafter Comcast will stop carrying that TLD to protect all the children.

Very simple solution: Abolish all .tlds except for the national ones. Let each nation handle its own registry, have its own regulations, and let them worry about how to handle and organize pornographic content. The websites would be subject to the regulation of their own host country and no other - so if you're under the .us domain, you can't be sued for violating the laws of France unless you duplicate that material to the .fr domain.

I agree with this idea, it makes a lot of sense.Although some international domains would have to be allowed for international organisations, but would not be for open registration.

I love all these prudish (typically American) people who are convinced that moving porn sites into their own special domain is going to bring down society (and the KIDS! Think of the kids!). The .xxx TLD makes sites easier to identify as being X-rated, which benefits both visitors to these sites and the rest of us who may wish to avoid these sites. It'll only work well as a voluntary scheme though.

Also, how the hell is it ICANN's job to remove porn from the internet???

I think many porn sites would voluntarily use it. Why not, focuses audience and much easier to keep the kiddies away. Plus, from a marketing standpoint it creates even more of a "forbidden fruit" genre, keeping the viewers coming.

There's no question that they would use it. The problem is that they aren't likely to abandon their .com equivalents when .xxx becomes available.

Perhaps a simple redirect from their .com to their .xxx would allow content filtering to still work?

The .xxx domain was first proposed in 2001 and approved in 2005 for exclusive (but voluntary) use by the adult entertainment industry.

This is the reason why it will not work, and why it's a waste of time -- unless it becomes mandatory that all pr0n site have a .xxx TLD then it's useless. But, who is going to police it? Who is going to classify what's pr0n what what's not? Surely it will differ between countries...Giant. Waste. Of. Time.

How would you enforce something that is a global phenomenon? The only thing the US can control is what US corporations do, and it's very easy to set up off-shore accounts to circumvent US laws.

This initiative is as idiotic as it always was. Some will migrate to the new TLD, others won't, and nothing will ever change that.

All it takes to make .xxx attractive to porn site operators is a legislative carrot. Something like a blanket exemption from obscenity and indecency laws if your site is only accessible via a .xxx domain (enforced by you checking a Host header in HTTP, for example).

Not just that, but you *can* remove porn from the .com domains - ICANN simply needs to change its policies to say "you will not use this domain for pornographic material", if someone with a .com domain hosts porn, ICANN can then revoke their domain. Simples.

Sure, you'll need to go to court/arbitration to decide whether a .com site is hosting porn or something justifiable - eg naked people on a medical site for example, but its pretty simple to say that some nudity is intended for entertainment purposes only.

the threat of having their domain removed should be sufficient for porn operators to move to .xxx, especially if they get the option to swap their old .com for a shiny new .xxx TLD during a migration period (of say, a year).

I don't really see why a porn site wouldn't use .xxx as their tld. It would simplify the search used, and help them to keep all their material under one roof so to speak. Not only that but it would help filtering software eliminate accidental viewing, or even purposeful viewing, by those unauthorized to access that content,

Will it make it easier to find porn? Probably, however if it eliminates accidental viewing I don't really see a problem. The FRC imo just wants to force their views by making the governing bodies do this rather than taking the responsibility to teach their family members that there is software that will block these sites. Or even better teaching them that the internet is a vast resource and many websites can have questionable material and should not be visited.

I think many porn sites would voluntarily use it. Why not, focuses audience and much easier to keep the kiddies away. Plus, from a marketing standpoint it creates even more of a "forbidden fruit" genre, keeping the viewers coming.

I agree. Porn operators are in the business of making money, nothing more. This idea that they are prowling the internet trying to ensnare your children is ridiculous. Why would they want children to visit their sites when children don't have credit cards?Of course, not everybody will move voluntarily, but if 90% (or 80% or even 50%) of sites move, that will go a long way to making the internet a little easier to navigate.

God, the FRC and all those other ignorant fools out there make me sick. They get up on their moral high horse about issues they don't even understand. .xxx will not magically make more porn, it will just make it easier to segregate from non-adult content, which actually would be beneficial to the causes those idiots supposedly ascribe to.

I believe we should pass legislation stating that humans who fail to use their brains should be robbed of them, so that we may study them and provide better medical and technological insights to other humans who are actually trying to us the one gift we have that separates us from the rest of God's creations.

Slightly OT. The FCC, ICANN, and other organizations that field complaints from the public should have a policy to count all of the form letters they receive from the same organization as a single entry. The vast majority of these "complaints" are driven by campaigns that watch dog groups like the Parent's Television Council initiate to have their followers bombard regulators because they know how to exploit the system.

All it takes to make .xxx attractive to porn site operators is a legislative carrot. Something like a blanket exemption from obscenity and indecency laws if your site is only accessible via a .xxx domain (enforced by you checking a Host header in HTTP, for example).

Give porn sites a reason to move, and they'll do it.

+1

You can begin pr0n discernment with unsimulated_sex=porn. That would get rid of 95% of what makes people's faces go red.

I think many porn sites would voluntarily use it. Why not, focuses audience and much easier to keep the kiddies away. Plus, from a marketing standpoint it creates even more of a "forbidden fruit" genre, keeping the viewers coming.

I don't know. How about how easy it is to block a single TLD? Also, in what way is this a marketing ploy? Do you plan on typing random names followed by .xxx? Rather, do you intend to perform a Google search for content? If it's the latter, how does XXX help?

wjousts wrote:

I agree. Porn operators are in the business of making money, nothing more. This idea that they are prowling the internet trying to ensnare your children is ridiculous. Why would they want children to visit their sites when children don't have credit cards?

Because little Johnny would never use his mommy's credit card to gain access to illicit content? And we know that URL squatters and redirects to porn just never happen?

Honestly, a game I used to play in the 90's was to see how many clicks it took to get from a harmless site like Disney.com to porn. Typically it was 10 or less. A new TLD will change this how?

Quote:

Of course, not everybody will move voluntarily, but if 90% (or 80% or even 50%) of sites move, that will go a long way to making the internet a little easier to navigate.

Easier how? Once again, you're acting like every time you hit the net you have some insane hierarchy that you must wade through to find content like running the tree command in DOS. How will a new TLD change your Bing/Yahoo/Google searches for the better or for the worse? Nothing changes, absolutely nothing.

farnz wrote:

All it takes to make .xxx attractive to porn site operators is a legislative carrot. Something like a blanket exemption from obscenity and indecency laws if your site is only accessible via a .xxx domain (enforced by you checking a Host header in HTTP, for example).

The .xxx domain was first proposed in 2001 and approved in 2005 for exclusive (but voluntary) use by the adult entertainment industry.

This is the reason why it will not work, and why it's a waste of time -- unless it becomes mandatory that all pr0n site have a .xxx TLD then it's useless. But, who is going to police it? Who is going to classify what's pr0n what what's not? Surely it will differ between countries...Giant. Waste. Of. Time.

How would you enforce something that is a global phenomenon? The only thing the US can control is what US corporations do, and it's very easy to set up off-shore accounts to circumvent US laws.

This initiative is as idiotic as it always was. Some will migrate to the new TLD, others won't, and nothing will ever change that.

Your points are the exact points I was trying to make - hence Giant. Waste. Of. Time.

I agree. Porn operators are in the business of making money, nothing more. This idea that they are prowling the internet trying to ensnare your children is ridiculous. Why would they want children to visit their sites when children don't have credit cards?

Because little Johnny would never use his mommy's credit card to gain access to illicit content?

And those charges will eventually be reversed costing the operator money (in addition to having to deal with an irate parent and bad PR) . So how do they gain from that again?

I agree. Porn operators are in the business of making money, nothing more. This idea that they are prowling the internet trying to ensnare your children is ridiculous. Why would they want children to visit their sites when children don't have credit cards?

Because little Johnny would never use his mommy's credit card to gain access to illicit content?

And those charges will eventually be reversed costing the operator money (in addition to having to deal with an irate parent and bad PR) . So how do they gain from that again?

Credit cards are not an indication of "legal age". People under the legal age can get credit cards.

Verifying legal age is actually the prime problem with access. You can segregate it all you want and install all the nanny software you want, and some enterprising kid will get around all of it.

I oppose this domain - like profanity, the term "xxx" has a built-in value judgment "dirty" "smutty" etc. Also, there are a lot of adult-oriented sites that aren't necessarily porn. I would support a more neutral domain like .adult or such that was reserved for 18+ sites, including porn but not so narrow and loaded.

When will these people learn that a single classification, "xxx", will never be useful to more than one culture. Everyone will never agree on what merits special labeling.

For instance, in the US, we're fine with kids watching mass murder on TV or in a movie. But the human body? That's evil and kids must be kept away. Obviously, the rest of the world has drastically different standards. And this is also the case with regard to sex and nudity.

Thus, TLDs are exactly the wrong method to communicate the content of websites. A list of clearly defined categories is the only solution. These would not be mutually exclusive. For instance: Nude breasts, touching of breasts, titty effing, intercourse, foreign object penetration, etc...

Imagine... there will be websites out there competing for the top score... "we've checked every checkbox and left no debauchery unturned." lol

ICANN are trying to justify their existence and more TLDs is always a blatant money grab.

As mentioned previously all TLDs should be abolished except for ccTLDs that each country regulates. Don't like something in your country? Hassle politicians to change it. Don't like something in another country? Boo hoo, sad day for you, stop trying to force your puritanical views on others, it's futile. Problem solved.

The FRCs denouncement of .xxx shows a clear misunderstanding of technology. The idea that it is "opening up new digital real estate for porn" is silly.

That said, many people here are being just as silly. For instance:

Quote:

God, the FRC and all those other ignorant fools out there make me sick. They get up on their moral high horse about issues they don't even understand. .xxx will not magically make more porn, it will just make it easier to segregate from non-adult content

It won't actually do anything of the sort. Sure, it would be drop-dead simple to filter any HTTP request with a Host: *.xxx request header. However, imagine that an unrealistically high goal of 80% of porn sites move to .xxx *and* abandon .com. Even a very bad content filter will probably hit 95% of these sites. A good one will probably hit 100%. Identifying the majority of porn has *never* been a serious problem with filters. The real problems are 1) false positives. .xxx won't do anything to help this, since the filters will still be required. 2) catching the last few percent of porn. This tends to be the more unusual or debatable content, or a small amount of porn in an otherwise non-porn website, not major commercial porn sites. This stuff is not going to move to .xxx anyway.

Next up:

Quote:

I think many porn sites would voluntarily use it. Why not, focuses audience and much easier to keep the kiddies away. Plus, from a marketing standpoint it creates even more of a "forbidden fruit" genre, keeping the viewers coming.

There are several things wrong with this. Yes, many sites will adopt .xxx if it is available. I doubt many of them will give up their current .com addresses. Even sites that don't have a lot of branding invested in their .com names have a vested interest in circumventing blocking technologies. First off, like any internet sites, lots of porn is ad supported. From a financial standpoint, sites that rely on ad revenue don't really care whether their viewers are children or otherwise unable to purchase services. Second, sometimes even supposedly responsible adults are subjected to filtering. Some ISPs which buy into the hype will probably filter the entire .xxx domain, especially in parts of the world where pornography is illegal. Of course, the ISPs could implement content based filtering as well, but commercial porn operators are not going to go out of their way to help ISPs block potentially paying customers.

And this:

Quote:

They are not going to make money from people who don't want to see porn? So why should they care if those people block it?

Aside from ad supported content I mentioned above, there is a substantial amount of anecdotal evidence that suggests that plenty of people are opposed to porn and are still porn fiends. While this may suggest that porn is actually harmful and should be the subject of regulation, it means that porn site operators don't want to make it easy for self-hating porn addicts to get their fix.

I can go on:

Quote:

You can begin pr0n discernment with unsimulated_sex=porn. That would get rid of 95% of what makes people's faces go red.

Not really. At the very best this is a very US centric viewpoint. Within the US, I would say the reverse is true. 99% of non-simulated sex would bother most Americans in public schools. However, there is plenty of other content that will anger lots of people: drawn or animated sex, solo nudity, nudity with implied sex, censored nudity with implied sex (lots of R rated movies here) near-nudity intended for titilation (maxim), near nudity not ostensibly not only for titilation (news report on spring break). Written erotica. Written descriptions of sex not intended to be erotic. That is not even counting various controversial issues such as homosexuality that a majority of americans agree should not be censored but still infuriate many people. If you consider home or business use, or even private school use, the "sex==porn" assignment becomes even less useful. Broaden